Biz Gilwalker wrote:Mully couldn't get it going tonight at all. He had a good 3 or 4 shots roll around the inside of the rim and pop out. He was also taking somw bad shots.

Only maybe one or two shots were questionable. Most of his shots were good shots. Wide open. He just couldn't make them. Neither could Sessions who was 0-9. Last night Nash was 2-11 and Greg Monroe was 2-9. But I guess they're lousy players like Mullens too.

Guess we gotta wait on Barg to switch teams cause really there's no comparison. If they out this mullens kid on some of those horrible rosters the past 4 years and made him the number one option drawing all the attention it would be ugly/

Biz Gilwalker wrote:Mully couldn't get it going tonight at all. He had a good 3 or 4 shots roll around the inside of the rim and pop out. He was also taking somw bad shots.

Only maybe one or two shots were questionable. Most of his shots were good shots. Wide open. He just couldn't make them. Neither could Sessions who was 0-9. Last night Nash was 2-11 and Greg Monroe was 2-9. But I guess they're lousy players like Mullens too.

It is really that hard to come to terms that Mullens sucks at shooting? You just compared him to two guys who for their career basically have a 50% percentage. Mullens is a 40% shooter, and 30% from three... there are only so many ways you can sugarcoat crap.

The idea of this thread is that Mullens is supposed to be what Bargnani is suppose to be? Well Mullens is a worse player... You don't win with players like Mullens or Bargnani... you lose because of them. They are only good for is getting lotto picks.

It is illogical to use logic on an illogical person.Solution...use even more illogical logic to trump their logic.Things I have learned on the general board this week The Spurs are semi tanking and aren't interesting in repeating.